General allegations against family members in dowry cases require specific acts to justify cognizance; otherwise, such proceedings may be quashed as an abuse of legal process.

ORDER :

J.SREENIVAS RAO, J.

1. This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5, seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.298 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kodangal, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short ‘DP Act’).

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 29.06.2024 at 17:00 hours, the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 09.05.2016, in the presence of village elders, she married accused No.1. At the time of marriage, her parents gave six tulas of gold, Rs.1,50,000/- cash, Rs.73,000/- for a bike, and Rs.40,000/- for household articles. They lived together happily for 11 months and were blessed with a baby girl, who unfortunately died three days after birth. Thereafter, her husband became addicted to alcohol and started harassing her physically and mentally, demanding an additional dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- from her parents. Despite living together, the harassment continued, and on 20.10.2023, he and his family members demanded the additional dowry and expelled her from the house. On 08.11.2023, a panchayat was held at Kondareddypally village, in which her parents and villagers explained that her parents are poor and they were unable to pay any amount and requested him to lead a happy life with the complainant. However, he again demanded Rs.2,00,000/- and continued to harass her. The complainant requested to take legal action against the above-named persons.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to the order dated 18.03.2025, personal notice was sent to respondent No.2 by way of RPAD, and the said notice was delivered to respondent No.2 on 03.04.2025. He further submitted that a memo was filed vide U.S.R.No.43560 of 2025, dated 21.04.2025, enclosing the postal track record and registered postal receipts. According to the learned counsel, notice has been duly served on respondent No.2. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 has not chosen to enter appearance. Hence, this Court has no option except to proceed with the matter on merits.

4. Heard Mr.K.Lakshmi Manohar, learned counsel for petitioners and Mr.M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the present crime solely on the ground that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the parents, and petitioner Nos.3 and 4 are the brother and sister of accused No.1. He further submitted that respondent No.2 filed a private complaint on 01.02.2024, and the same was referred to the police for investigation. Basing on the same, Crime No.121 of 2024 was registered on 29.06.2024. The Investigating Officer, without conducting proper investigation, filed the final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodangal and the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the same and numbered it as C.C.No.298 of 2024.

5.1. He further submitted that even according to the allegations made either in the complaint or in the final report, the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the petitioners. Respondent No.2 has implicated all the family members of accused No.1 by making omnibus allegations, only on the ground that they supported accused No.1. He further submitted that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are senior citizens and are doing agriculture. After the marriage of respondent No.2 with accused No.1, they have been living separately, and at no point of time petitioner Nos.1 and 2